View a local image or prior output without network requests or generation charges; returns actual pixels and dimensions for inspection.
View a local image or a prior output. Returns actual image pixels and dimensions. For embedded generation settings use novelai_metadata. No network request and no generation charge.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| path | No | ||
| run_id | No | ||
| image_index | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely new behavioral context beyond them: it returns actual pixel data plus dimensions, and it carries no network call and no credit cost — the cost/latency trait an agent needs.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Three short sentences, front-loaded with the core action, then the return content, then the sibling redirect and cost note. No filler.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
With no output schema, describing the return (pixels and dimensions) is the right call and is done. But with 0% parameter coverage and all parameters optional, the description should explain how path, run_id, and image_index interact and what a no-argument call does — that gap is unaddressed.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 0% for all three parameters, so the description carries the full burden and largely fails it. Only loose hints map to parameters ('local image' implies path, 'prior output' implies run_id); image_index is never mentioned, nor is the relationship or precedence between path and run_id.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
States a specific verb+resource ('View a local image or a prior output') and names the two input modes, plus explicitly routes metadata extraction to novelai_metadata. An agent can distinguish this from the other novelai_* tools without opening the schema.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Gives a clear when-to-use alternative ('For embedded generation settings use novelai_metadata') and clarifies this path has no network request or generation charge, which disambiguates it from generation tools. It does not, however, state what happens when no arguments are supplied or when path and run_id conflict.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.